Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

An update on salary transparency in job posts

directlyapply.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 150 posts

Re: An update on salary transparency in job posts

#11

Post by toomuchtodo »

linuxftw wrote: post #8
bearjaws wrote: post #2

Now lets quantify how many of them are absurd listings. Recently saw a Senior Security Engineer role for Netflix, $100-$700k salary range. How is someone supposed to reasonably negotiate that role? $100k is clearly a joke, $700k is clearly a salary someone got during the bubble. Do I come in at $400k? Is $250k a bargain rate? https://imgur.com/a/0Fe00Qf

This is an often proffered limitation of these laws, but there are second order effects. If someone hires a woman, minority, whatever else, at the $100k rate with the same qualifications they typically hire X group at the $700k rate, they're going to have some 'splainin' to do.

Perfect is the enemy of good enough. If laws are found to have bugs, you keep patching them over time to close the loopholes.

Re: An update on salary transparency in job posts

#12

Post by thebradbain »

bearjaws wrote: post #2

Now lets quantify how many of them are absurd listings. Recently saw a Senior Security Engineer role for Netflix, $100-$700k salary range. How is someone supposed to reasonably negotiate that role? $100k is clearly a joke, $700k is clearly a salary someone got during the bubble. Do I come in at $400k? Is $250k a bargain rate? https://imgur.com/a/0Fe00Qf

A big range like that means you should feel more than fine selecting the average— so $400k— at the minimum. Anything less and you’re essentially admitting you don’t think you’re worth what the salary range is.

Personally I would ask for clarification, and if they refuse to provide any, ask for near or above the top-end of the range. Theres plenty of $215k salary jobs currently, so if you happen to not land this one, then no loss of what you never had. But if you happen to get this job, making $700k, simply for asking, then congrats!

Re: An update on salary transparency in job posts

#13

Post by lotsofpulp »

bearjaws wrote: post #2

Now lets quantify how many of them are absurd listings. Recently saw a Senior Security Engineer role for Netflix, $100-$700k salary range. How is someone supposed to reasonably negotiate that role? $100k is clearly a joke, $700k is clearly a salary someone got during the bubble. Do I come in at $400k? Is $250k a bargain rate? https://imgur.com/a/0Fe00Qf

>How is someone supposed to reasonably negotiate that role?

Get a competing job offer.

A minimum price lets labor sellers know if it is worth applying or not, and trends in supply and demand for that type of labor (based on which way the minimums are moving industry wide).

Re: An update on salary transparency in job posts

#14

Post by toomuchtodo »

melvinmelih wrote: post #10
singron wrote: post #4

The scariest thing about the salary transparency laws is that it makes it blindingly obvious that companies do not regularly follow the law. Adherence is both very public and easy, but imagine all the other laws being broken all the time that aren't as trivial to comply with.

Since the job listings are public it should be trivial to compile a public shame list of companies who still do not follow the rules in those states.

Perhaps you could also use such a list to seek damages in states where the law allows for it (Washington state [1]) and provide the list to states where damages are not provided to encourage lawmakers to make the policy more robust.

> If a company violates the new requirement [2], “a job applicant or an employee” is entitled to remedies, according to a state Legislature website. Those remedies could include up to $5,000 in compensation [3].

[1] https://www.seattletimes.com/business/months-after-wa-employ... ("Months after WA employers required to share pay info, a flood of lawsuits")

[2] https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=49.58.110

[3] https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=49.58.060

Re: An update on salary transparency in job posts

#15

Post by zeroCalories »

tbrake wrote: post #7

I hope the next step is narrowing the ranges of "info" provided. You'll sometimes see postings like "Sr Staff Engineer at [fancy corp]: 135K-900K". Info like that is better than nothing, sure, but not by much.

Imo the important information is the floor. If I could be offered an offensively low number after the trouble of applying and interviewing, I don't want to bother. The upper bound is at best for outlier rock star devs that might apply, at worst it's just bait or some arbitrary max.

Re: An update on salary transparency in job posts

#16

Post by wredue »

bearjaws wrote: post #2

Now lets quantify how many of them are absurd listings. Recently saw a Senior Security Engineer role for Netflix, $100-$700k salary range. How is someone supposed to reasonably negotiate that role? $100k is clearly a joke, $700k is clearly a salary someone got during the bubble. Do I come in at $400k? Is $250k a bargain rate? https://imgur.com/a/0Fe00Qf

Does Netflix do location based pay? Could explain that.

Not that I necessarily agree with location based pay scales. I haven’t really thought about this idea tbh. On one hand, a company can get location based pay scales simply by having an office in a different area. On the other, if you’re hired in San Fran and working remotely in (some much cheaper to live place) then it’s not really the same. Obviously, the state is benefiting much less from this scenario.

Re: An update on salary transparency in job posts

#17

Post by nightski »

linuxftw wrote: post #8
bearjaws wrote: post #2

Now lets quantify how many of them are absurd listings. Recently saw a Senior Security Engineer role for Netflix, $100-$700k salary range. How is someone supposed to reasonably negotiate that role? $100k is clearly a joke, $700k is clearly a salary someone got during the bubble. Do I come in at $400k? Is $250k a bargain rate? https://imgur.com/a/0Fe00Qf

This is an often proffered limitation of these laws, but there are second order effects. If someone hires a woman, minority, whatever else, at the $100k rate with the same qualifications they typically hire X group at the $700k rate, they're going to have some 'splainin' to do.

But if it isn't a minority or woman then whatever right?

Re: An update on salary transparency in job posts

#19

Post by barryrandall »

bearjaws wrote: post #2

Now lets quantify how many of them are absurd listings. Recently saw a Senior Security Engineer role for Netflix, $100-$700k salary range. How is someone supposed to reasonably negotiate that role? $100k is clearly a joke, $700k is clearly a salary someone got during the bubble. Do I come in at $400k? Is $250k a bargain rate? https://imgur.com/a/0Fe00Qf

Don't apply. The employer is showing you how they operate when they're trying to impress candidates. Do you really want to find out what they do when they know your best alternative is a job search?

Re: An update on salary transparency in job posts

#20

Post by joncrocks »

thebradbain wrote: post #12
bearjaws wrote: post #2

Now lets quantify how many of them are absurd listings. Recently saw a Senior Security Engineer role for Netflix, $100-$700k salary range. How is someone supposed to reasonably negotiate that role? $100k is clearly a joke, $700k is clearly a salary someone got during the bubble. Do I come in at $400k? Is $250k a bargain rate? https://imgur.com/a/0Fe00Qf

A big range like that means you should feel more than fine selecting the average— so $400k— at the minimum. Anything less and you’re essentially admitting you don’t think you’re worth what the salary range is. Personally I would ask for clarification, and if they refuse to provide any, ask for near or above the top-end of the range. Theres plenty of $215k salary jobs currently, so if you happen to not land this one,…

The issue is that if you're currently making $200K, it's hard to tell where they might think you might sit in that scale up-front.

It's a bit like saying "Employee - $10K-$10M p/a" - It's not very useful in a job posting, as you might reasonably assume someone being paid the top salary is not actually doing the same role as at the bottom range.

Post reply on HN